UC-NRLF 


SB    ETM    M2D 


Sngeraoll  Lectures  011  ^Tmmortalitp 


IMMORTALITY  AND  THE  NEW  THEODICY.  By 
Georgb  A.  Gord.on,  D.  D.    1896. 

HUMAN  IMMORTALITY.  Two  supposed  Objections 
to  the  Doctrine.  By  Professor  William  James.  1897. 

DIONYSOS  AND  IMMORTALITY:  The  Greek  Faith 
in  Immortality  as  affected  by  the  rise  of  Individual- 
ism.   By  President  Benjamin  Ide  Wheeler.     1898. 

THE  CONCEPTION  OF  IMMORTALITY.  By  Pro- 
fessor JOSIAH  ROYCB.      1899. 

LIFE  EVERLASTING.    By  John  Fiske, LL.D.  1900. 

SCIENCE  AND  IMMORTALITY.  By  William Osler, 
M.  D.,  LL.  D.     1904. 

THE  ENDLESS  LIFE.  By  Samuel  M.  Crothers, 
D.  D.     1905. 

INDIVIDUALITY  AND  IMMORTALITY.  By  Professor 

WlLHELM  OSTWALD.      1906. 

THE   HOPE   OF   IMMORTALITY.     By  Charles  F. 

Dole.    1907. 
BUDDHISM  AND  IMMORTALITY.    By  William  S. 

Bigelow,  M.  D.     1908. 
IS     IMMORTALITY    DESIRABLE?     By  G.    Lowes 

Dickinson,   Fellow  of  King's  College,  Cambridge. 

1909. 
EGYPTIAN     CONCEPTIONS     OF    IMMORTALITY. 

By  George  A.  Reisner.     191  i. 

HOUGHTON  MIFFLIN  COMPANY 
Boston  and  New  York 


INDIVIDUALITY   AND 
IMMORTALITY 


W$t  31ngersoll  JUcture,  iso6 


INDIVIDUALITY  AND 
IMMORTALITY 


BY 


WILHELM   OSTWALD 
'I 

Professor  of  Physical  Chemistry  at  the  University  of  Leipzig 
Temporary  Professor  at  Harvard  University 


BOSTON   AND   NEW    YORK 
HOUGHTON    MIFFLIN   COMPANY 


-Br**/ 


COPYRIGHT   1906  BY  WILHELM  OSTWALD 
ALL   RIGHTS   RESERVED 

Published  February  igob 


^ 


THE  INGERSOLL  LECTURESHIP 


Extract  from  the  -will  of  Miss  Caroline  Haskell  Ingersoll, 

who  died  in  Keene,  County  of  Cheshire,  New 

Hampshire,  Jan.  26,  i8gj. 

First.  In  carrying  out  the  wishes  of  my  late 
beloved  father,  George  Goldthwait  Ingersoll,  as 
declared  by  him  in  his  last  will  and  testament,  I 
give  and  bequeath  to  Harvard  University  in  Cam- 
bridge, Mass.,  where  my  late  father  was  graduated, 
and  which  he  always  held  in  love  and  honor,  the 
sum  of  Five  thousand  dollars  ($5,000)  as  a  fund  for 
the  establishment  of  a  Lectureship  on  a  plan  some- 
what similar  to  that  of  the  Dudleian  lecture,  that  is 
— one  lecture  to  be  delivered  each  year,  on  any  con- 
venient day  between  the  last  day  of  May  and  the 
first  day  of  December,  on  this  subject,  "the  Im- 
mortality of  Man,"  said  lecture  not  to  form  a  part 
of  the  usual  college  course,  nor  to  be  delivered  by 
any  Professor  or  Tutor  as  part  of  his  usual  routine 
of  instruction,  though  any  such  Professor  or  Tutor 
may  be  appointed  to  such  service.  The  choice  of 
said  lecturer  is  not  to  be  limited  to  any  one  religious 
denomination,  nor  to  any  one  profession,  but  may 
be  that  of  either  clergyman  or  layman,  the  appoint- 
ment to  take  place  at  least  six  months  before  the 
delivery  of  said  lecture.  The  above  sum  to  be 
safely  invested  and  three  fourths  of  the  annual  in- 
terest thereof  to  be  paid  to  the  lecturer  for  his 
services  and  the  remaining  fourth  to  be  expended 
in  the  publishment  and  gratuitous  distribution  of 
the  lecture,  a  copy  of  which  is  always  to  be  fur- 
nished by  the  lecturer  for  such  purpose.  The  same 
lecture  to  be  named  and  known  as  "the  Ingersoll 
lecture  on  the  Immortality  of  Man." 


360469 


INDIVIDUALITY  AND 
IMMORTALITY 

WHEN  the  great  and  unex- 
pected honor  of  being  in- 
vited to  deliver  the  Ingersoll 
Lecture  on  Immortality  came  to  me, 
my  feelings  were  of  a  rather  complex 
nature.  First  of  all,  I  felt  of  course 
proud,  and  thankful  that  I  was  to  be 
intrusted  with  such  a  responsible  task. 
Secondly,  I  felt  a  deep  respect,  not  only 
for  the  men  who  did  me  the  honor  to 
invite  me,  but  also  for  the  institution 
under  whose  auspices  the  lecture  is 
delivered.  For  as  a  general  thing,  a 
scientist,  whose  task  it  is  to  analyze 
the  facts  of  experience  irrespective  of 


2:.  'INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

any  preconceived  ideas,  will  not  find 
his  results  in  accordance  with  ideas 
which  are  handed  down  from  genera- 
tion to  generation  —  ideas  which  have 
become  venerable,  not  only  because  of 
their  age,  but  also  because  of  the  in- 
fluence which  they  have  had  upon  the 
development  of  mankind.  There  is  a 
certain  danger,  not  only  in  the  occur- 
rence of  such  possible  differences,  but 
also  in  the  mere  fact  that  the  scientist 
applies  his  trenchant  and  merciless 
tools  of  investigation  to  subjects  which 
interest  us  because  of  their  practical 
bearing,  and  are  at  the  same  time  dear 
to  our  hearts  and  closely  connected 
with  our  deepest  and  most  earnest 
feelings. 

The  fact  that  such  considerations 
did  not  prevent  the  invitation  shows 


IMMORTALITY  3 

once  more  how  deeply  the  modern 
man  is  persuaded  of  the  ultimate 
wholesomeness  of  truth.  No  matter 
where  an  unprejudiced  search  after 
truth  may  lead  an  investigator ;  if  his 
work  is  that  of  an  honest  scientist  it 
must  and  will  finally  turn  out  to  be  for 
the  benefit  of  mankind.  Our  know- 
ledge is  an  incomplete  piece  of  patch- 
work ;  but  each  one  of  us  is  bound 
to  make  the  best  possible  use  of  the 
incomplete  knowledge  he  possesses, 
conscious  always  that  his  results  are 
any  day  liable  to  be  replaced  by  new 
discoveries  or  ideas.  So  the  authori- 
ties in  charge  of  the  Ingersoll  Lecture 
thought  it  right,  if  I  understand  them 
correctly,  that  the  subject  should  be 
investigated  from  every  possible  point 
of  view,  being  sure  that  this  is  the 


4      INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

only  way  that  can  bring  us  nearer  and 
nearer  to  the  ultimate  truth. 

If  a  chemist  or  physicist  of  to-day 
is  asked  about  his  ideas  on  immor- 
tality, his  first  feeling  will  be  that  of 
some  astonishment.  He  meets  with 
no  question  in  his  work  which  is  con- 
nected with  this  one,  and  his  reply 
may  usually  be  classified  under  one  of 
two  heads.  He  may  remember  the  re- 
ligious impressions  which  have  clung 
to  him  since  his  youth,  kept  alive  by 
him  or  nearly  forgotten,  as  the  case  may 
be,  and  he  will  then  explain  that  such 
questions  are  in  no  way  connected  with 
his  science;  for  the  objects  treated  by 
his  science  are  non-living  matter.  This 
is  immediately  evident  in  physics,  and 
while  there  exists  an  organic  chemistry, 
he  will  explain  that  any  matter  which 


IMMORTALITY  5 

is  called  organic  in  his  sense  is  de- 
cidedly dead  before  it  can  become 
the  object  of  his  investigation.  It  is 
only  the  inanimate  part  of  the  world 
which  concerns  him  scientifically,  and 
any  ideas  he  may  hold  about  the  ques- 
tion of  immortality  are  his  private 
opinions  and  quite  independent  of  his 
science.  Or  he  may  dismiss  his  inter- 
locutor still  more  shortly  by  saying 
from  his  standpoint  of  matter-and- 
motion:  Soul  is  a  function  of  living 
matter  only.  The  moment  life  ceases 
in  an  organized  body  the  value  of 
this  function  becomes  zero,  and  there 
is  no  further  question  about  immor- 
tality. 

The  very  fact  that  I  am  standing 
before  you  at  this  moment,  ready  to 
deliver  the  Ingersoll  Lecture,  shows 


6      INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

that  in  my  opinion  there  is  something 
more  to  be  said  about  this  question  than 
is  contained  in  these  two  answers.  I 
do  not  intend  to  follow  the  line  of  the 
first  answer  and  to  explain  in  an  apolo- 
getic way  that,  while  physical  science 
has  nothing  to  say  about  immortality, 
neither  does  it  shut  out  any  of  the 
perspectives  that  are  possible,  and  that 
a  man  is  left  free  to  think  or  to  believe 
anything  which  is  brought  home  to 
him  by  special  considerations.  That 
this  standpoint  is  a  practicable  one  is 
proven  by  the  fact  that  even  so  great 
a  scientist  as  Michael  Faraday  main- 
tained it  through  his  long  and  incom- 
parably fruitful  career. 

It  will  be  necessary  to  investigate 
the  other  standpoint  mentioned  with 
much  greater   minuteness   than   that 


IMMORTALITY  7 

reached  by  giving  the  brief,  character- 
istic reply.  It  must  be  restated  from 
its  very  foundation,  because,  as  I  have 
been  maintaining  for  the  last  ten  years, 
the  matter-and-motion  theory  (or  sci- 
entific materialism)  has  outgrown  it- 
self and  must  be  replaced  by  another 
theory,  to  which  the  name  Energetics 
has  been  given.  The  question  there- 
fore takes  the  form,  What  has  ener- 
getics to  say  about  immortality  ? 

If  we  ask,  Upon  what  property  does 
the  difference  between  man  and  even 
the  highest  of  the  lower  animals  de- 
pend? we  get  a  most  varied  set  of 
answers  from  different  people.  But 
when  all  considerations  other  than 
purely  empirical  ones  are  put  aside, 
we  find  this  difference  dependent  on 
the  different   development  of  memory. 


8      INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

Memory  is  the  indispensable  prere- 
quisite for  learning,  and  man's  culture 
rises  so  much  higher  than  that  of  any- 
animal  simply  because  his  memory  is 
by  far  the  best.  Memory  helps  man 
in  knowing  how  to  act  when  dangers 
approach  or  wants  are  to  be  satisfied. 
By  memory  he  learns  to  distinguish 
between  good  and  evil.  Memory  helps 
him  not  only  to  look  into  the  past, 
which  can  no  longer  be  changed  at 
will,  but  also  to  look  into  the  future, 
which  may  be  changed  to  his  advan- 
tage. For  if  he  knows  how  things  hap- 
pen he  can  foresee  the  later  part  of  an 
event  of  which  only  an  earlier  part  has 
been  observed.  The  series  of  consec- 
utive events  which  he  can  survey  at 
any  given  time  may  be  a  short  or  a 
long  one,  and  his  power  of  prediction 


IMMORTALITY  9 

will  be  small  or  great  accordingly ;  but 
in  every  case  he  can  act  as  a  prophet, 
though  perhaps  not  always  a  very 
powerful  one. 

Memory  in  the  broadest  sense  is 
found  even  in  the  lowest  forms  of  ani- 
mal life,  and  in  fact  in  all  organic  life. 
As  Hering  pointed  out  a  long  time 
ago,  memory  is  a  universal  function  of 
all  living  matter,  if  the  meaning  of 
the  word  be  extended  to  its  proper 
generality.  The  possession  of  mem- 
ory means,  then,  that  all  living  matter 
is  so  changed,  by  any  process  which 
goes  on  in  it,  that  a  repetition  of  the 
same  process  becomes  easier,  or  occurs 
sooner,  or  takes  place  more  quickly, 
than  any  other  process.  What  the 
cause  of  this  property  may  be  we  do 
not  know,  and  the  construction  of  any 


io    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

example  or  analogy  from  a  physical- 
chemical  standpoint  is  not  an  easy 
thing  to  do.  There  is  no  reason  why 
this  should  not  be  done,  however,  and 
it  seems  possible  that  we  may  some 
day  find  out  the  very  means  which  na- 
ture uses  in  the  formation  of  memory. 
This  part  of  the  question,  however, 
does  not  directly  concern  us  in  the  pre- 
sent investigation. 

It  is  wonderful  how  the  considera- 
tion of  this  property  enables  us  to 
understand  certain  very  general  and 
important  facts  concerning  living  be- 
ings. That  organisms  form  classes 
and  species  is  a  consequence  of  this 
property,  for  no  animal  or  plant  would 
keep  a  constant  form  or  constant 
habits  if  the  repetition  of  an  act  al- 
ready performed  were  not  easier  than 


IMMORTALITY  n 

doing  something  new.  The  process 
resembles  a  path  through  the  wilder- 
ness. The  mere  fact  that  the  foot- 
prints of  a  previous  wanderer  can  be 
recognized  is  sufficient  to  cause  the 
later  wanderer  to  keep  in  the  same 
path,  although  he  might  possibly  find 
another  more  convenient  way  if  he 
made  himself  independent.  The  third 
man  follows  where  his  predecessors 
went,  and  the  path  becomes  more  and 
more  distinct  and  a  deviation  from 
it  more  and  more  difficult  and  un- 
likely to  occur.  We  may  imagine  the 
processes  which  brought  about  the 
origin  of  species  and  the  maintenance 
of  their  relatively  constant  properties 
to  have  been  of  this  same  type. 

A  very  important  point  in  this  gen- 
eral idea  is  the  transmission  of  memory 


12    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

from  parents  to  offspring.  The  great 
riddle  of  heredity,  which  caused  Dar- 
win so  much  thinking  without  a  cor- 
responding result,  may  be  brought 
somewhat  nearer  to  a  solution  by  the 
aid  of  this  same  concept  of  memory. 
A  general  view  of  the  facts  of  genera- 
tion and  propagation  shows  us  that  the 
life  of  the  offspring  is  nothing  more 
nor  less  than  the  continuation  of  the 
life  of  the  parents.  Among  simple  cells 
propagation  usually  takes  the  form  of 
a  simple  division ;  the  nucleus  first 
dividing  itself  into  two  equal  parts,  and 
the  whole  cell  soon  afterward  separat- 
ing into  two.  It  is  impossible  to  tell 
in  this  case  which  of  the  two  cells  is 
the  parent  and  which  is  the  offspring, 
since  the  two  parts  remain  alike  during 
the  whole  process  of  separation,  and 


IMMORTALITY  13 

each  may  claim  with  the  same  right 
either  relation  to  the  other. 

Neither  is  it  possible  to  say  that 
the  parent  cell  has  died  in  giving 
rise  to  the  two  child-cells.  The  tran- 
sition from  the  stage  of  a  single  cell 
to  that  of  two  separate  cells  is  a  quite 
continuous  one,  and  there  is  no  mo- 
ment when  the  old  cell  disappears 
or  ceases  to  exist.  No  part  of  the 
original  cell  can  be  recognized  as  the 
corpse  of  a  being  which  has  perished. 
The  only  possible  way,  then,  of  look- 
ing at  this  process  is  to  say  that  the 
life  of  the  original  cell  is  continued 
under  changed  circumstances,  namely, 
instead  of  one  individual,  two  now  exist. 
If  the  two  cells  remain  united,  as  is 
usual  in  organisms  consisting  of  a  great 
number  of  cells,  no  doubt  occurs  to  us 


14    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

as  to  the  continuance  of  the  life  of  the 
organism,  even  though  all  of  its  con- 
stituent cells  divide  until  not  one  of 
the  original  cells  remains.  And  the  case 
is  certainly  not  in  the  least  changed  if 
the  two  cells  separate,  either  immedi- 
ately after  their  formation  or  at  a  later 
time,  into  two  independent  individuals. 
In  this  way  life  may  continue,  even 
if  one  of  the  child-cells  perishes  by 
some  accident.  For  each  of  the  new 
cells  will  divide  again,  and  the  greater 
the  number  of  individual  cells  formed, 
the  more  certain  the  continuance  of 
their  common  life.  Death  has  here 
lost  much  of  his  power ;  many  individ- 
uals may  perish,  but  the  organism  as 
such  remains  alive.  Only  when  the 
very  last  of  all  the  offspring  perishes 
may  death  be  regarded  as  the  victor. 


IMMORTALITY  15 

In  following  out  this  train  of  ideas 
we  have  already  approached  the  ques- 
tion of  immortality,  for  a  famous  bio- 
logist has  called  the  fact  just  described 
Immortality.  It  is  not  my  intention 
to  adopt  this  view,  for  while  the  possi- 
bility of  final  death  is  much  lessened 
by  propagation  and  separation,  or,  in 
general,  by  the  dissipation  of  life,  it  is 
not  entirely  excluded,  but  only  made 
more  improbable. 

We  can  easily  conceive  of  circum- 
stances of  such  a  generally  deadly  char- 
acter that  no  individual  can  escape 
them.  Then  the  divided  organism  will 
die  just  as  does  the  single  one.  The 
question  of  the  occurrence  of  such  an 
event  in  the  world's  history  cannot  be 
answered  conclusively,  because  it  is 
connected  with  that  other  open  ques- 


16    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

tion,  Are  all  the  living  beings  on  the 
earth  descended  from  one  single  cell, 
or  has  life  come  into  being  at  different 
places  and  times  ?  If  we  choose  the 
first  alternative,  then  all  existing  or- 
ganisms are  descendants  or  parts  of 
the  same  organism,  and  this  organism 
has  enjoyed  practical  immortality  up 
to  the  present.  Even  in  the  other 
case  it  is  not  necessary  to  assume  that 
any  one  of  the  different  parent  organ- 
isms which  have  developed  at  various 
times  has  finished  its  career,  since  all 
of  them  may  have  survived  in  their 
oifspring.  Be  that  as  it  may,  we  can 
conceive  of  a  universal  catastrophe 
which  would  annihilate  all  life  in  all 
parts  of  the  world,  —  which  would 
destroy  all  the  descendants  of  the  first 
cell  or  first  cells.    And  this  conception 


IMMORTALITY  17 

destroys  the  possibility  of  calling  this 
sort  of  existence  immortality,  since  the 
idea  of  immortality  includes  not  only 
an  unlimited  possibility  for  the  contin- 
uance of  life,  but  also  an  absolute  im- 
possibility of  destroying  it  utterly. 

Although  we  meet  with  the  idea  of 
immortality  in  this  line  of  thought, 
examination  shows  that  we  do  not  find 
real  immortality  here.  And  1  feel  sure 
that  none  of  us  expected  to  find  it 
here,  since  it  is  not  a  material  immor- 
tality but  a  spiritual  one  that  we  are 
seeking.  Let  us  therefore  return  to 
our  starting-point,  the  consideration  of 
memory  in  its  broadest  sense,  as  set 
forth  by  Hering.  We  found  that  the 
existence  of  various  species  was  ex- 
plained by  the  general  fact  of  memory 
as  well  as  by  heredity.    And  this  idea 


18    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

is  a  still  more  far-reaching  one,  since 
memory  explains  also  the  functions 
of  mind. 

From  the  chaotic  stream  of  ever- 
changing  events  which  forms  our  life, 
those  parts  which  are  repeated  in  a 
similar  way  distinguish  themselves  by 
their  mere  repetition  in  accordance  with 
the  law  of  memory.  They  take  place 
more  easily  and  form  prominent  parts 
of  the  stream  of  events.  Here  we  find 
the  cause  of  reflex  actions,  instinctive 
actions,  and  finally  of  conscious  mem- 
ory. All  the  content  of  our  experience 
relates  to  such  repeated  events  only, 
for  only  repeated  experience  is  expe- 
rience in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word. 
Only  by  repetition  do  we  gain  know- 
ledge, and  only  such  series  of  facts  as 
are  repeated  in  a  similar  way  become 


IMMORTALITY  19 

so  known  to  us  that  we  can  predict 
from  one  part  of  such  a  series  the  parts 
which  are  to  follow.  The  mind  is  no- 
thing more  than  a  collection  of  such 
known  series.  If  we  experience  a  wholly 
new  event,  we  invariably  say  that  we 
do  not  understand  it,  and  only  after 
due  repetition  can  it  form  a  part  of  true 
experience. 

Thus  those  parts  of  our  general  ex- 
perience which  recur  often  in  the  same 
way  appear  to  be  the  most  important 
parts,  and  indeed  the  only  ones  worth 
knowing.  To  explain  the  repetition  of 
similar  experiences  we  are  accustomed 
to  make  the  assumption  that  the  re- 
peated parts  are  in  existence  all  the 
time,  and  that  their  appearance  and 
disappearance  is  caused  only  by  the 
variable  direction  of  our  attention.    I 


20    INDIVIDUALITY    AND 

may  be  looking  at  a  flower-pot  on  my 
window-sill.  I  turn  to  my  book  and 
the  flower-pot  disappears  so  far  as  I 
am  concerned.  I  turn  my  head  again, 
and  the  flower  -  pot  appears.  What 
better  supposition  can  I  make  than 
that  it  stood  there  all  the  while,  since 
it  depends  only  on  my  turning  my 
head  whether  the  flower-pot  shall  form 
a  part  of  my  consciousness  or  not  ? 

In  this  way  we  get  the  idea  of  an 
existence  which  lasts  longer  than  our 
sense-impression  does.  With  visible, 
unchanging  objects  this  supposition 
appears  very  natural  and  self-evident, 
although  the  arbitrary  part  of  it  has 
been  recognized  since  the  time  of 
Berkeley.  But  in  the  same  way  we 
form  the  idea  of  persistence  in  the  case 
of  far  more   abstract   concepts.   The 


IMMORTALITY  21 

chemist  asserts  that  when  he  has 
burned  coal  to  an  invisible  gas,  car- 
bonic acid,  the  vanished  carbon  has 
not  really  disappeared,  but  only  been 
transformed  into  another  form  by  its 
combination  with  the  oxygen  of  the 
air.  In  this  case  the  supposition  is 
much  more  far-fetched,  since  all  the 
appreciable  properties  of  the  carbon 
have  disappeared  with  the  exception 
of  weight,  and  this  persists  only  in 
the  sense  that  the  carbonic  acid  has  a 
weight  equal  to  the  sum  of  the  weights 
of  the  carbon  and  the  oxygen  before 
the  change.  But  since  it  is  possible  to 
invert  the  process  and  change  the  car- 
bonic acid  into  exactly  as  much  carbon 
and  oxygen  as  disappeared  during  its 
formation,  we  get  a  brief  and  intelli- 
gible description  of  these  facts  by  con- 


22    INDIVIDUALITY   AND  , 

sidering  the  elements  of  a  compound 
substance  as  being  hidden  in  it  in  some 
unrecognizable  new  form  from  which 
they  can  be  recovered  by  proper  means. 
This  is  the  true  sense  of  the  law  of  the 
conservation  of  the  elements. 

Still  less  obvious  is  the  persistence 
of  the  most  general  entity  we  know  of 
in  the  physical  world.  I  mean  Energy. 
Energy  in  the  form  of  mechanical  work 
may  be  transformed  into  electricity, 
assuming  a  wholly  new  shape  which  has 
nothing  in  common  with  the  former 
one  except  the  proportionality  of  the 
quantities.  And  electricity  may  be 
transformed  into  light  or  heat  or  chem- 
ical energy,  assuming  the  most  diverse 
forms.  But  if  we  conclude  such  a  se- 
ries of  transformations  by  changing 
the  energy  back  into  the  form  of  me- 


IMMORTALITY  23 

chanical  work,  we  get  exactly  the 
amount  we  started  from,  provided  that 
all  losses  on  the  way  have  been  avoided 
or  taken  into  account.  We  summarize 
this  behavior  by  saying,  Energy  can- 
not be  created  or  destroyed  :  energy 
is,  therefore,  an  eternal  thing. 

There  are  a  number  of  other  things 
which  are  endowed  with  this  same 
property  of  persistence.  Mass  is  one 
of  these.  We  know  of  nothing  which 
can  affect  the  quantity  of  a  given  mass. 
We  may  cool  or  warm  it;  we  may 
bring  the  strongest  chemical  changes 
to  bear  on  it ;  it  may  show  a  change 
in  every  other  property  ;  but  its  mass 
will  not  change.  This  fact  is  usually 
expressed  by  the  words,  Matter  can- 
not be  created  or  destroyed.  But  in- 
asmuch as  the  term  "  matter  "  is  indis~ 


24    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

tinct  in  its  meaning  and  exhibits  many 
mystical  components  on  closer  inves- 
tigation, we  shall  do  better  to  avoid  the 
word  altogether  and  to  limit  our  con- 
siderations to  exactly  defined  magni- 
tudes. IF  you  say  that  mass  cannot 
be  created  or  destroyed,  you  state  ex- 
actly what  I  have  already  said,  —  that 
no  change  whatever  can  cause  a  given 
mass  to  change. 

We  have  then  already  two  things 
or  entities  which  seem  to  have  a  scien- 
tific right  to  be  called  eternal,  or  if  you 
like,  immortal.  Science  knows  of  still 
others,  but  as  investigation  of  them 
would  not  tell  us  anything  new,  we  may 
confine  ourselves  to  these  two.  Now 
what  does  it  mean  to  call  a  thing  eter- 
nal ? 

For  us  it  means  that  we  do  not  know 


IMMORTALITY  25 

of  any  circumstance  by  which  the 
amount  of  mass  or  the  amount  of 
energy  in  a  given  system  has  ever  been 
changed.  We  conclude  from  this  that 
in  future  no  circumstance  will  occur 
which  will  cause  such  a  change.  You 
see  immediately  how  very  shaky  the 
ground  is  on  which  this  best  known 
scientific  eternity  rests.  It  is  the  most 
philistine  idea  that,  because  things 
have  until  now  gone  on  in  a  certain 
way,  therefore  they  will  never  go  in 
any  other  way.  And  however  closely 
we  examine  the  case,  we  find  that  it 
always  comes  back  to  this  same  point. 
You  may  say,  It  is  well  known  that 
everything  in  the  world  is  regulated 
by  cause  and  effect;  that  inviolable 
laws  rule  in  the  same  way  the  path  of 
the  sun  and  the  vibrations  of  the  sin- 


26    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

gle  atom.  When. I  ask.  How  do  you 
know  this  ?  and  get  the  answer,  This 
is  the  general  result  of  experience, 
then  we  find  ourselves  at  the  starting- 
point  again.  For  experience  tells  us 
that  things  have  happened  in  accord- 
ance with  this  rule  up  to  the  present ; 
but  that  they  will  happen  in  the  same 
way  throughout  all  the  future  is  a  mere 
assumption,  which  may  have  a  greater 
or  a  smaller  probability,  but  conveys 
no  certainty  whatever. 

This  result  is  not  altered  by  the  fact 
that  certain  predictions  have  proven 
to  be  very  close  to  the  facts  of  later 
experience.  The  motion  of  the  heav- 
enly bodies  gives  us  an  example  of  a 
probability  which  comes  very  near  to 
being  a  certainty.  We  are  able  now 
to  calculate  eclipses  to  a  fraction  of 


IMMORTALITY  27 

a  second,  provided  they  are  to  occur 
at  a  time  not  too  remote.  But  all 
of  these  calculations  depend  on  our 
knowledge  of  certain  numerical  val- 
ues, especially  the  masses  of  the 
moving  bodies,  and  our  prediction 
becomes  the  more  uncertain  the  far- 
ther off  the  eclipse  is  to  be.  Let  us 
assume  as  an  example  that  the  time  of 
an  eclipse  a  hundred  years  off  can  be 
calculated  with  an  error  as  small  as  a 
tenth  of  a  second.  For  a  thousand 
years  the  error  will  then  be  a  second, 
and  for  a  million  years  a  thousand 
seconds,  or  more  than  half  an  hour. 
In  fifty  million  years  it  becomes  a 
whole  day,  and  in  eighteen  thousand 
million  years  the  error  amounts  to  a 
whole  year,  provided  the  different  laws 
on  which  the  calculation  is  based  are 


28    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

absolutely  correct.  Even  this  assump- 
tion is  not  at  all  a  justifiable  one,  and 
so  our  true  probability  in  this  case 
shrinks  to  a  much  smaller  value  still. 
What  will  be  the  result  finally  if  we 
extend  our  calculation  to  eternity? 
The  answer  is  simply,  An  infinitely 
large  probable  error,  or  no  probability 
at  all. 

Our  conviction  as  to  the  eternity 
of  mass  is  of  exactly  the  same  kind. 
Even  if  we  assume  that  our  experi- 
ences concerning  mass  will  not  change 
in  general  character  in  the  future,  it 
must  still  be  remembered  that  our 
means  of  investigating  possible  changes 
in  mass  are  limited  in  accuracy.  We 
are  able  to  determine  the  mass  of  a 
kilogram  to  a  millionth  of  its  value. 
To  this   degree  of  accuracy  science 


IMMORTALITY  29 

of  our  time  has  attained.  If  we  then 
assume  that  no  greater  change  than 
this  millionth  will  occur  in  a  given 
mass  in  a  hundred  years,  we  can  easily 
calculate  the  time  necessary  for  our 
kilogram  to  disappear  completely.  If 
some  one  became  convinced,  as  a  con- 
sequence, for  example,  of  an  otherwise 
developed  theory  of  "  matter,"  that 
such  a  change  really  does  occur,  we 
would  be  wholly  unable  to  disprove 
his  theory  by  reference  to  the  inde- 
structibility of  mass.  All  we  could 
show  him  is  that  the  change  cannot 
well  be  greater  than  the  amount  stated, 
and  this  with  the  proviso  that  masses 
behave  in  future  as  we  know  they  have 
behaved  in  the  past. 

In    connection  with    this   we  may 
consider  another  class  of  permanent 


30    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

beings,  the  chemical  elements.  The 
law  above  mentioned  can  be  extended 
to  the  conservation  of  the  elements,  and 
it  then  states  that  a  given  quantity  of 
any  element  cannot  be  altered  by  any 
change.  If  we  start,  for  example,  with 
one  gram  of  iron,  and  change  it 
through  any  series  of  compounds,  we 
can,  at  any  stage  of  the  transformation, 
get  our  iron  back  unaltered  in  weight 
and  with  unaltered  properties.  These 
facts  are  described  in  a  hypothetical 
way  by  assuming  that  the  elements 
consist  of  very  small  atoms  of  definite 
shape  and  weight,  and  that  chemical 
combination  consists  in  the  union  of 
two  or  more  different  atoms  by  some 
bond,  electrical,  gravitational,  or  what- 
ever it  may  be.  Since  atoms  are  assumed 
to  keep  their  individuality  in  all  their 


IMMORTALITY  31 

combinations,  it  seems  quite  evident 
that  elements  should  be  recoverable 
without  change  from  their  combina- 
tions. The  atoms  have  in  this  case 
only  hypothetical  existence,  and  this 
picture  of  the  behavior  of  the  chemical 
elements  is  therefore  also  a  hypothet- 
ical one,  but  the  law  of  the  conserva- 
tion of  the  elements  is  an  empirical 
law  and  a  very  exact  one  too. 

It  is  only  in  the  last  year  or  so  that 
our  hitherto  unshaken  conviction  of 
the  eternity  of  elements  has  suffered 
a  severe  blow.  I  refer  to  the  discovery 
by  Sir  William  Ramsay  of  the  fact 
that  the  element  radium  can  change 
into  another  element,  helium,  and 
something  else  that  is  not  yet  known. 
From  the  standpoint  of  a  chemical 
"  Weltanschauung "  this  is  the  most 


32    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

important  discovery  since  the  date  of 
the  discovery  of  oxygen,  when  our 
present  ideas  about  the  fundamental 
concepts  of  chemistry  began  to  take 
form.  It  teaches  unquestionably  that 
there  are  some  elements  at  least  which 
are  decidedly  mortal.  The  investiga- 
tions of  Rutherford  have  brought  to 
our  attention  a  whole  series  of  such 
elements,  possessing  varying  lifetimes. 
Some  of  these  come  into  existence  only 
to  leave  this  vale  of  tears  after  a  few 
seconds,  while  others  measure  their 
lives  in  hours,  days,  years,  and  millions 
of  years.  We  know  indeed  only  very 
little  about  the  other  properties  of 
these  ephemeral  beings,  and  they  are 
characterized  mainly  by  their  aver- 
age time  of  life,  which  can  be  mea- 
sured by  fairly  accurate  and  convenient 


IMMORTALITY  33 

methods.  From  these  facts  it  is  not  a 
very  long  step  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  other  elements,  which  have  as  yet 
shown  us  no  signs  of  mortality,  hide 
this  property  only  by  virtue  of  the  ex- 
treme slowness  of  their  passing.  This 
case  shows  very  clearly  how  such  possi- 
bilities as  have  been  described  as  being 
beyond  our  limited  means  of  obser- 
vation may  become  realities  if  these 
means  are  sufficiently  refined. 

Energy  occupies  a  somewhat  surer 
position,  inasmuch  as  we  do  not  yet 
possess  any  hint  of  its  mortality,  or 
know  of  any  exceptions  to  the  law  of 
the  conservation  of  energy.  This  same 
wonderful  substance,  the  element  ra- 
dium, has  threatened  energy  in  its  con- 
servatism, not  with  mortality,  but  the 
contrary,  a  creation  out  of  nothing. 


34  INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

If  you  place  a  piece  of  radium  in  a 
calorimeter  you  will  observe  that  it 
gives  out  heat  for  days  and  weeks  and 
months  and  years  without  interruption 
and  at  a  constant  rate.  This  seemed 
even  more  impossible  than  a  perma- 
nent annihilation  of  energy,  and  the 
riddle  remained  unsolved  until  Ram- 
sey made  the  discovery  described 
above.  The  transmutation  of  radium 
into  helium  is  the  source  of  the  de- 
veloped heat.  Just  as  steam  yields 
heat  when  it  changes  into  liquid  water, 
so  radium  develops  heat  when  it 
changes  into  helium.  So  the  law  of 
the  conservation  of  energy  is  sus- 
tained by  the  facts,  and  from  what  I 
know  of  science  I  have  the  impres- 
sion that  energy  will  outlive  every- 
thing else  in  the  universe.    I  should 


IMMORTALITY  35 

not  feel  justified  in  saying  more  than 
this. 

But  to  resume  our  theme :  all  of 
our  inferences  about  eternity  are  based 
on  extrapolation  from  finite  time  and 
observations  coupled  with  a  certain 
error.  It  is  a  general  rule  that  such 
extrapolations  become  the  more  un- 
certain the  farther  they  go,  and  for 
infinite  time  or  space  the  probable 
error  oversteps  all  limits,  and  the  con- 
trary of  our  prediction  may  be  as  true 
as  the  prediction  itself. 

In  science,  therefore,  no  predictions 
of  any  kind  which  relate  to  infinite 
time  or  to  eternity  are  possible.  For 
a  limited  time  predictions  are  possi- 
ble, but  never  with  absolute  certainty. 
They  are  in  every  case  subject  to  a  cer- 
tain probable  error,  which  is  dependent 


36    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

on  the  nature  of  the  case,  but  increases 
invariably  with  the  length  of  time  over 
which  the  prediction  is  extended. 

Science  does  not  give  us  the  only 
possibility  of  reaching  a  knowledge  of 
the  future.  Religious  beliefs,  reve- 
lations, and  other  similar  sources  of 
assurance  exist,  and  these  may  indeed 
convey  to  some  minds  a  stronger 
conviction  of  the  truth  of  a  predic- 
tion than  is  afforded  by  science.  But 
there  is  a  great  difference  in  the  in- 
terpretation reached  by  various  men 
guided  by  these  different  sources.  Re- 
ligious beliefs  and  similar  sources  are 
limited  in  the  matter  of  the  number 
of  men  giving  them  credence,  and  it 
is  generally  admitted  that  the  convic- 
tion of  their  truth  is  dependent  on  a 
certain  kind  of  interior  personal  expe- 


IMMORTALITY  37 

Hence.  They  offer  no  general  proofs 
which  must  be  accepted  until  error  is 
found  in  them,  as  is  the  case  with  sci- 
entific proofs,  and  they  can  only  be 
accepted  by  those  who  have  passed 
through  the  inner  experience  and  had 
the  truth  revealed  to  them  by  intui- 
tion. 

If,  then,  the  predictions  of  science 
lose  somewhat  in  force  with  the  indi- 
vidual, they  gain  much  in  the  very 
generality  of  their  acceptance.  Of  all 
the  common  treasures  of  mankind, 
science  is  by  far  the  most  general 
and  the  one  most  independent  of  dif- 
ferences in  race,  sex,  and  age.  And 
while  a  religious  belief  invariably  shows 
historically  the  greatest  changes  in 
content  and  intensity,  science  may  seem 
to  grow  slower  or  faster  at  different 


38    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

periods,  but  the  growth  is  constantly 
in  the  same  direction.  Science  may 
therefore  be  considered  as  the  surest 
and  most  lasting  part  of  the  spiritual 
treasure  which  man  possesses.  Such 
predictions  as  are  indorsed  by  science 
are  accepted  as  the  most  reliable  ones 
by  the  intelligent  majority  of  men. 

Let  us  turn  to  another  aspect  of 
the  eternity  of  energy  and  mass.  If 
we  take  two  different  masses  and  com- 
bine them,  the  resulting  mass  will  be- 
have like  the  sum  of  the  two  single 
masses.  This  is  a  regular  and  imme- 
diate consequence  of  the  conservation 
of  mass,  showing  that  physical  addi- 
tion does  not  change  masses  in  amount. 
But  though  the  two  masses  retain  their 
quantity r,  they  lose  their  individuality. 
If  one  of  the  masses  was  of  one  kilo- 


IMMORTALITY  39 

gram  and  the  other  of  two,  the  joint 
mass  will  be  one  of  three  kilograms. 
This  mass  may  be  divided  again  into 
two,  one  of  one,  and  the  other  of 
two  kilograms;  but  all  our  ways  of 
measuring  mass  fail  to  tell  whether 
the  new  kilogram  is  identically  the 
old  one,  or  is  formed  wholly  or  par- 
tially from  the  former  two  kilogram 
mass.  This  is  a  general  fact  of  very 
great  importance  indeed,  and  it  may 
be  illustrated  by  another  example.  If 
you  take  two  glasses  of  water  and  pour 
them  together  into  one  basin,  the  sum 
of  the  two  quantities  is  obtained.  You 
may  then  fill  the  two  glasses  again 
from  the  basin,  but  there  is  no  means 
known  in  earth  or  heaven  of  finding 
out  whether  the  water  in  each  glass  is 
now  the  same  as  before.    Indeed,  the 


40    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

question  as  to  the  identity  or  non- 
identity  of  the  different  portions  of 
water  is  without  meaning,  since  there 
is  no  means  of  singling  out  the  indi- 
vidual parts  of  the  water  and  identify- 
ing them. 

The  thought  may  occur  to  some 
one  that  if  we  could  observe  the  indi- 
vidual atoms  of  water  identification 
would  be  possible.  Even  this  hope  I 
must  destroy.  For  the  atomic  theory 
starts  from  the  assumption  that  the 
atoms  of  water  are  all  alike  in  shape, 
weight,  and  other  inherent  properties, 
and  that  they  vary  only  in  such  pro- 
perties as  may  belong  to  one  and  the 
same  atom ;  velocity  and  direction  of 
motion,  for  example.  The  same  is 
assumed  for  every  other  pure  sub- 
stance.  So  any  means  of  identification 


IMMORTALITY  41 

is  excluded  by  our  definition.  More 
than  that,  atoms  are  only  hypothetical 
things,  and  even  if  they  could  be 
identified,  the  identification  would  be 
a  hypothetical  one,  and  not  a  real  one. 
And  the  same  conclusion  holds  true 
for  energy.  So  far  there  has  been  no 
assumption  of  an  atomistic  structure 
of  energy,  evidently  because  no  scien- 
tific necessity  has  led  to  such  an  hy- 
pothesis. And  so  the  identification  of 
any  special  bit  of  energy  appears  still 
more  hopeless  than  it  did  in  the  case 
of  mass.  By  coming  into  contact  with 
another  quantity  of  like  energy  it  is 
at  once  lost  as  completely  as  a  drop 
is  lost  in  the  ocean.  It  retains  its  ex- 
istence only  in  that  it  adds  its  share  to 
the  common  quantity  of  energy,  and 
no  means   is   known  by  which  this 


42    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

token  of  its  continued  existence  can 
be  destroyed. 

This  behavior  is  the  more  remark- 
able in  that  not  the  least  doubt  occurs  to 
us  about  the  identity  of  the  bit  of  mass, 
or  of  water,  or  the  bit  of  energy,  so 
long  as  they  are  kept  alone.  Identity  or 
individuality  or  personality,  whichever 
you  may  wish  to  call  it,  is  maintained 
under  these  circumstances.  It  is  a 
strange  thing  indeed  that  by  merely 
being  associated  with  another  thing  of 
the  same  kind  identity  is  lost.  And 
still  more  strange  is  the  fact  that  every 
being  of  this  kind  seems  driven  by  an 
irresistible  impulse  to  seek  every  oc- 
casion for  losing  its  identity.  Every 
known  physical  fact  leads  to  the  con- 
clusion that  diffusion,  or  a  homoge- 
neous distribution,  of  energy  is  the 


IMMORTALITY  43 

general  aim  of  all  happenings.  No 
change  whatever  seems  to  have  oc- 
curred, and  probably  none  ever  will 
occur,  resulting  in  a  concentration 
greater  than  the  corresponding  dissi- 
pation of  energy.  A  partial  concen- 
tration may  be  brought  about  in  a 
system,  but  only  at  the  expense  of  a 
greater  dissipation,  and  the  sum  total 
is  always  an  increase  in  dissipation. 

While  we  are  as  sure  as  science  can 
make  us  about  the  general  validity  of 
this  law  as  applied  to  the  physical 
world,  its  application  to  human  de- 
velopment may  be  doubted.  It  seems 
to  me  to  hold  good  in  this  case  also, 
if  it  is  applied  with  proper  caution. 
The  difficulty  lies  in  the  circumstance 
that  we  have  no  exact  objective  means 
of  measuring  homogeneity  and  hetero- 


44    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

geneity  in  human  affairs,  and  we  can 
therefore  not  study  any  given  system 
closely  enough  to  draw  a  quantitative 
conclusion.  It  seems  pretty  certain 
that  increase  of  culture  tends  to  dimin- 
ish the  differences  between  men.  It 
equalizes  not  only  the  general  standard 
of  living,  but  attenuates  also  even  the 
natural  differences  of  sex  and  age. 
From  this  point  of  view  I  should  look 
upon  the  accumulation  of  enormous 
wealth  in  the  hands  of  a  single  man  as 
indicating  an  imperfect  state  of  cul- 
ture. 

The  property  which  has  been  de- 
scribed as  an  irresistible  tendency 
toward  diffusion  may  also  be  observed 
in  certain  cases  in  man.  In  conscious 
beings  such  natural  tendencies  are  ac- 
companied by  a  certain  feeling  which 


IMMORTALITY  45 

we  call  will,  and  we  are  happy  when 
we  are  allowed  to  act  according  to  these 
tendencies  or  according  to  our  will. 
Now,  if  we  recall  the  happiest  mo- 
ments of  our  lives,  they  will  be  found 
in  every  case  to  be  connected  with  a 
curious  loss  of  personality.  In  the 
happiness  of  love  this  fact  will  be  at 
once  discovered.  And  if  you  are  en- 
joying intensely  a  work  of  art,  a  sym- 
phony of  Beethoven's,  for  example, 
you  find  yourself  relieved  of  the  bur- 
den of  personality  and  carried  away  by 
the  stream  of  music  as  a  drop  is  carried 
by  a  wave.  The  same  feeling  comes 
with  the  grand  impressions  nature 
gives  us.  Even  when  I  am  sitting 
quietly  sketching  in  the  open  there 
comes  to  me  in  a  happy  moment  a 
sweet  feeling  of  being  united  with  the 


46    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

nature  about  me,  which  is  distinctly 
characterized  by  complete  forgetful- 
ness  of  my  poor  self.  We  may  con- 
clude from  this  that  individuality 
means  limitations  and  unhappiness,  or 
is  at  least  closely  connected  with  them. 
Considering  living  beings  more 
closely,  we  find  generally  greater  in- 
dividuality united  with  shorter  dura- 
tion. We  have  already  seen  that  we 
must  distinguish  several  grades  of  in- 
dividuality. The  life  of  any  animal  or 
plant  is  limited  either  by  partition, 
when  the  single  being  changes  into 
two,  or  by  death,  when  it  changes  into 
none.  Either  change  may  properly  be 
called  a  loss  of  individuality,  for  by 
the  fact  of  division  the  concept  of  an 
individual  is  contradicted  as  strongly 
as  by  the  fact  of  death. 


IMMORTALITY  47 

But  we  may,  as  I  have  already  ex- 
plained, consider  the  sum  of  all  the 
generations  issuing  from  the  first  liv- 
ing being  as  a  collective  individual. 
Such  a  collective  being  is  of  course 
possessed  of  less  individuality,  but  it 
has  increased  in  duration.  Looked  at 
in  this  way,  animate  beings  arrange 
themselves  into  a  continuous  series 
with  inanimate  matter,  in  which  we 
found  exactly  the  same  reciprocal  re- 
lation between  individuality  and  du- 
ration :  the  least  individualized  things, 
like  mass  and  energy,  are  the  most 
durable  ones,  and  vice  versa.  This  is 
indeed  quite  general.  The  most  indi- 
vidualized thing  imaginable  is  the  pre- 
sent moment :  it  is  quite  unique  and 
will  never  return  ;  it  is  an  absolute 
individuum.    In  our  memory,  when 


48    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

other  moments  have  taken  its  place, 
it  gradually  loses  its  character  and  be- 
comes more  and  more  like  other  mo- 
ments ;  this  the  more  the  farther  back 
it  goes  in  memory,  and  soon  it  cannot 
be  distinguished  from  other  moments  ; 
at  last  it  is  forgotten,  and  dies  like  an 
animal  or  plant. 

Different  moments  have  very  dif- 
ferent periods  of  life  in  our  memory. 
Among  the  mass  of  unimportant  and 
insipid  moments,  which  die  almost  as 
soon  as  they  are  born,  we  find  some 
whose  influence  is  felt  over  days, 
months,  years,  even  over  the  whole 
of  our  conscious  lifetime.  Their  mem- 
ory is  not  lost  so  long  as  the  man  lives 
to  whom  this  moment  came,  and  in 
this  way  the  inherent  brevity  of  the 
moment's  existence  is  overcome  and 


IMMORTALITY  49 

it  persists.  It  is,  however,  not  eternal, 
since  memory  ends  with  life. 

Immortality,  in  the  immediate  sense 
of  the  word,  is  of  course  not  to  be 
found  in  human  beings.  "  All  men 
are  mortal  "  is  indeed  one  of  the  most 
trivial  empirical  facts  in  our  experi- 
ence. So  when  we  turn  to  human 
immortality,  we  can  only  ask,  Is  there 
in  man  anything  more  permanent  than 
his  body  ? 

In  this  connection  we  must  remem- 
ber that  the  individuality  of  a  living 
man  is  an  incomplete  and  changing 
one.  We  are  not  in  advanced  age 
and  in  youth  the  same  individual. 
Mind  and  body  go  through  a  series 
of  changes  during  life,  so  that  the 
same  person  at  different  ages  is  as 
different  as  different  men  are.   What 


5o    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

we  call  the  individuality  of  a  man 
consists  only  in  the  continuity  of  his 
changes,  and  the  only  sure  means  of 
identifying  a  man  is  to  trace  his  ex- 
istence continually  through  interme- 
diate time.  If  a  man  survives  his 
body,  the  continuity  of  his  existence 
is  broken  by  the  event  of  death,  and 
if  he  is  possessed  of  immortality  of 
some  kind,  it  can  be  of  only  a  partial 
nature. 

Secondly,  survival  in  some  form  or 
other  does  not  necessarily  mean  im- 
mortality. To  deserve  the  name,  the 
surviving  part  must  continue  its  ex- 
istence for  an  unlimited  time.  Then 
two  cases  seem  possible :  either  the 
surviving  part  changes  during  its  fur- 
ther existence  as  continually  as  it  did 
during  its  connection  with  the  body, 


IMMORTALITY  51 

or  it  remains  constant.  As  all  changes 
in  individuality  which  occurred  dur- 
ing the  term  of  ordinary  life  went  on 
in  regular  functional  relation  with  the 
changes  in  the  body,  the  inference  is 
near  that  the  body  conditioned  these 
changes,  and  that  after  its  withdrawal 
the  surviving  part  must  remain  con- 
stant. In  an  unchanging  state  like 
this  such  a  being  could  remain  for 
any  length  of  time,  for  an  infinite  time, 
indeed,  provided  it  could  exist  in  a 
place  where  no  changes  occurred.  But 
if  this  being  is  to  remain  in  connec- 
tion with  changing  beings  like  living 
men,  it  cannot  remain  unchanged, 
since  connection  and  mutual  influence 
mean  change,  and  all  the  above-de- 
scribed difficulties  of  a  changing  exist- 
ence extended  over  an  unlimited  time 


52   INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

arise  at  once.  And  if,  on  the  other 
hand,  as  is  often  assumed,  the  surviv- 
ing being  is  changed  into  a  transcend- 
ent state  in  which  there  is  no  question 
of  time  or  space,  then  any  kind  of  in- 
teraction between  such  a  being  and 
man  in  his  ordinary  life  seems  to  be 
excluded,  since  all  relations  with  us 
must  assume  the  forms  of  time  and 
space,  all  others  being  unintelligible 
to  us. 

The  conclusion  to  be  drawn  from 
these  considerations  reads  :  Either  the 
surviving  being  is  immortal  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  word,  in  which  case 
it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  it  could 
communicate  with  men,  and  its  exist- 
ence would  forever  remain  unknown 
to  us.  Or :  nothing  remains  after 
death,  in  which  case  we  should  of 


IMMORTALITY  53 

course  have  no  experience  of  any  sur- 
viving part  of  ourselves.  To  decide 
between  these  two  alternatives  is  im- 
possible, for  they  are  indistinguishable 
and  the  same  in  effect. 

We  may  then  turn  to  the  other 
seemingly  less  probable  assumption, 
that  there  is  something  which  survives, 
something  which  remains  in  connec- 
tion with  living  men,  and  is  therefore 
subject  to  change,  and  probably  lim- 
ited in  existence.  Does  experience 
aid  us  here  ? 

Every  man  leaves  after  his  death 
certain  things  in  the  world  changed 
by  his  influence.  He  may  have  built 
a  house,  or  gained  a  fortune,  or  writ- 
ten a  book,  or  begotten  children.  Even 
a  child  who  dies  soon  after  birth  leaves 
an  impression  on  his  mother,  which 


54    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

changes  her.  These  relics  are  wholly 
personal  or  individual,  and  depend  on 
the  man  who  caused  them  ;  only  their 
effect  is  not  alone  determined  by  this, 
but  also  by  the  person  or  thing  on 
which  the  effect  is  impressed.  Such 
effects  may  last  a  longer  or  a  shorter 
time,  but  they  finally  die  out  asymp- 
totically into  imperceptibility. 

There  is  a  very  general  desire  in 
mankind  to  leave  such  impressions. 
From  the  scratched  letters  which  a  boy 
scribbles  on  the  wall  to  the  pyramids 
which  have  stood  for  scores  of  cen- 
turies we  find  the  same  purpose,  —  to 
extend  the  results  of  personal  life  be- 
yond its  local  and  temporal  duration. 
And  we  are  not  fully  satisfied  with  the 
mere  existence  of  such  objective  sou- 
venirs, but  want  other  people  to  see 


IMMORTALITY  55 

them  and  realize  their  meaning.  So 
the  boy  does  not  scratch  lines  without 
significance,  but  the  letters  of  his  name 
or  something  else  which  interests  him, 
and  in  the  same  way  the  Egyptian 
king  did  not  forget  to  explain  by  let- 
ters and  pictures  his  own  connection 
with  the  huge  building  which  will 
carry  his  name  down  through  ages  in 
the  future. 

This  general  desire  for  the  propa- 
gation of  one's  personal  influence  is 
closely  connected  with  the  desire  for 
the  propagation  of  one's  flesh  and 
blood.  Looked  at  from  an  objective 
and  egotistic  standpoint,  it  seems  a 
rather  nonsensical  instinct.  Why 
should  I  desire  that  some  one  else 
should  enjoy  the  goods  of  this  world 
that  I  have  spent  my  whole  life  in 


56    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

gathering  ?  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  it 
makes  a  fundamental  difference  even 
to  the  most  hardened  egotist  whether 
this  some  one  else  is  his  own  son  or  a 
stranger.  He  would  not  move  a  finger 
for  the  stranger,  but  he  is  ready  to 
offer  the  greatest  sacrifices  for  his  son. 
It  is  true  that  there  are  some  excep- 
tions to  this  rule,  but  every  one  regards 
a  man  devoid  of  paternal  instinct  as  a 
monster,  an  ethical  cripple.  And  the 
fact  that  such  a  case  is  a  deviation  from 
the  general  rule  is  a  sufficient  reason 
against  its  continuance,  since  such  a 
man  would  either  have  no  children  at 
all,  or,  if  he  had,  he  would  neglect 
them  and  prevent  their  development. 
Remembering  that  family  and  race 
are  individuals  too,  of  larger  size  and 
more  diffused  than  a  single  man,  to 


IMMORTALITY  57 

be  sure,  but  still  possessing  very  defi- 
nite connections,  we  are  aware  at  once 
that  the  instinct  of  self-preservation 
is  here  at  work  again.  The  effects 
of  this  instinct  are  blended  with  and 
doubled  by  the  other  instinct  which 
makes  us  wish  to  leave  records  of  our 
existence  and  our  individuality,  and 
by  the  operation  of  these  factors  a  pro- 
longation of  every  individual  existence 
in  a  greater  or  less  degree  is  secured. 

Such  a  prolongation  is  not  immor- 
tality in  its  strictest  sense.  For  we 
observe  that  such  influences,  though 
they  outlive  the  term  of  bodily  life  in 
the  majority  of  cases,  gradually  cease 
to  act,  and  die  out  asymptotically,  just 
as  any  isolated  physical  existence  does, 
by  diffusing  into  the  great  mass  of 
general  existence  and  losing  individ- 


58    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

uality  and  the  possibility  of  being  dis- 
tinguished. 

This  is  true  primarily  in  the  course 
of  a  sequence  of  generations.  In  order 
that  a  family  may  be  continued,  the 
son  marries  a  wife  from  another  family, 
and  his  son  does  the  same.  As  a  result 
the  continuance  of  the  family  is  se- 
cured, but  at  the  cost  of  its  individu- 
ality. By  these  necessary  connections 
with  other  families,  diffusion  into  the 
general  mass  of  the  world  takes  place, 
and  the  very  means  of  continuing  its 
existence  results  in  this  inevitable  dif- 
fusion. And  finally  a  family  like  man- 
kind in  general  is  subject  to  the  pos- 
sibility of  ultimate  destruction  by  some 
cosmic  accident. 

And  other  things  left  by  an  indi- 
vidual  man    at  death  take  the  same 


IMMORTALITY  59 

course.  Consider  the  best  case,  where 
we  often  use  the  word  "  immortal,"  that 
of  a  great  poet  or  scientist.  We  say 
that  Homer  and  Goethe,  Aristotle 
and  Darwin,  are  immortal,  because 
their  work  is  lasting,  and  will  persist 
for  scores  of  centuries,  and  their  per- 
sonal influence  has  proven  independent 
of  their  bodily  existence.  Even  the 
fact  that  death  prevented  them  from 
doing  more  work  of  the  kind  they 
gave  to  us  during  their  lives  is  not  so 
important  as  it  would  seem  at  the  first 
glance.  When  a  man  grows  old  his 
creative  power,  both  bodily  and  men- 
tal, often  dies,  long  before  the  ordinary 
functions  of  life  have  ceased.  If  a  man 
lives  his  natural  time  out,  he  will  prob- 
ably do  all  the  work  that  he  is  able 
to  do  well,  and  his  death  is  then  not 


60    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

a  matter  of  importance.  Only  when 
death  is  premature  do  we  feel  that 
something  has  been  lost,  and  only  in 
such  cases  can  we  feel  that  death  is 
cruel  and  unjust. 

It  is  certainly  a  strarfge  thing  that 
physiology  has  done  so  little  to  ex- 
plain the  general  facts  of  age  and 
death.  Judging  by  our  present  know- 
ledge, there  is  no  reason  whatever  why 
a  living  being  should  not  live  for  any 
length  of  time.  All  the  matter  and 
energy  used  up  can  be  restored  by  nu- 
trition, and  there  seems  to  be  no  expla- 
nation for  the  fact  that  the  organism 
ceases  to  transform  nutrition  into  the 
materials  necessary  for  its  continuance, 
as  it  could  do  in  the  spring-time  of  its 
life.  It  would  seem  that  either  the 
store  of  some  necessary  factor  becomes 


IMMORTALITY  61 

exhausted,  or  that  some  pernicious 
factor  is  accumulated,  by  the  mere  fact 
of  living,  so  that  further  life  becomes 
at  last  impossible.  To  correct  this  in- 
fluence a  new  being  must  begin  life 
all  over  again,  and  therefore  death 
and  birth  are  to  be  considered  the 
means  by  which  life  is  continued  as 
long  as  possible. 

That  some  reason  of  this  nature 
exists  is  made  evident  by  the  well- 
known  experiments  of  Maupas  on  the 
propagation  of  protozoa.  If  they  are 
kept  in  the  environment  most  favor- 
able for  their  existence,  they  will  go  on 
for  a  time  growing  and  dividing  in  a 
quite  regular  manner.  But  after  a  series 
of  asexual  propagations  by  simple  di- 
vision they  suddenly  change  their  be- 
havior. They  couple  and  form  germs 


62    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

and  then  a  new  series  of  asexual  pro- 
pagations begins.  These  facts  can  be 
explained  in  exactly  the  way  already 
pointed  out:  either  some  poison  is 
developed  which  can  be  thrown  off 
only  by  sexual  propagation,  some 
necessary  factor  is  secured  by  this 
means  which  is  then  slowly  exhausted, 
and  the  lack  of  which  forces  the  being 
finally  to  secure  a  new  supply  by  a 
return  to  sexual  propagation. 

Considered  from  this  standpoint 
death  is  not  only  not  an  evil,  but  it  is 
a  necessary  factor  in  the  existence  of 
the  race.  And  looking  into  my  own 
mind  with  all  the  frankness  and  scien- 
tific objectiveness  which  I  can  apply  to 
this  most  personal  question,  I  find  no 
horror  connected  with  the  idea  of  my 
own  death.   Of  course  it  is  objection- 


IMMORTALITY  63 

able  to  suffer  illness  or  pain,  and  there 
are  beside  still  many  things  which  I 
should  like  to  do  or  to  experience  be- 
fore I  die.  But  this  would  be  a  loss  to 
me  only  if  I  were  afterward  conscious 
of  it  and  could  regret  it,  and  such 
possibilities  seem  to  be  out  of  the 
question.  As  to  my  friends  and  rela- 
tions, they  will  feel  my  loss  the  less, 
the  older  I  become.  After  I  have 
lived  out  the  span  of  my  life,  the 
bodily  ending  will  seem  a  perfectly 
natural  thing,  and  it  will  be  more  a 
feeling  of  relief  than  one  of  sorrow 
that  will  come  in  watching  the  end. 

Quite  independent  of  individual  life 
or  death,  the  work  a  man  has  done 
remains  effective.  How  long  it  will 
remain  effective  is  entirely  dependent 
on  the  degree  to  which  the  work  has 


64    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

suited  the  wants  of  the  race.  Work 
of  no  value  to  these  wants  will  be 
wiped  out  as  soon  as  possible,  while 
useful  work  will  be  retained  so  long  as 
it  is  seen  to  be  useful.  The  examples 
I  have  given  show  how  very  long  the 
influence  of  a  great  and  useful  worker 
may  persist,  but  there  is  no  doubt  that 
by  this  very  influence  the  individuality 
of  his  work  disappears,  however  slowly. 
It  becomes  more  and  more  a  part  of 
the  general  mental  equipment  of  his 
clan,  his  nation,  his  race.  It  will  then 
exist  as  long  as  these  exist,  no  longer 
as  a  distinct  idea  or  work  of  art,  but  as 
a  common  possession.  Here  again  the 
general  law  of  diffusion  already  met 
with  is  at  work,  and  duration  and  in- 
dividuality are  linked  as  are  reciprocal 
numbers:  the  one  increases  as  the 
other  diminishes. 


IMMORTALITY  65 

This  is  the  only  lasting  kind  of  life 
that  I  can  discover  in  the  realm  of 
our  experience.  In  this  man  is  distin- 
guished in  a  most  decisive  way  from 
all  of  his  fellow  creatures,  since  in  no 
lower  race  can  a  single  individuum  con- 
tribute his  share,  not  only  for  the  pro- 
pagation, but  also  for  the  general  de- 
velopment of  the  race.  Animals  seem 
generally  to  have  no  idea  of  death.  I 
remember  having  seen  a  mouse  step 
over  the  body  of  another,  which  had 
just  been  killed,  in  order  to  reach  its 
food  more  easily.  They  live  from  hand 
to  mouth,  with  no  other  foresight  than 
a  purely  instinctive  and  unconscious 
one.  In  such  animals  as  have  by  long 
domestication  been  influenced  by  man- 
kind, some  traces  of  conscious  foresight 
appear.    But  while  a  dog  shuns   his 


66    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

master's  whip,  the  effects  of  which  he 
has  experienced  and  can  therefore  fore- 
see, he  will  not  shun  his  master's  gun, 
even  though  it  has  just  killed  another 
dog  before  his  eyes.  The  human  hor- 
ror of  death  is  a  direct  consequence 
of  our  greatly  developed  powers  of 
foresight  and  memory,  and  this  horror 
has  been  developed  by  the  sight  of 
painful  and  premature  death.  Our 
civilization  is  proceeding  in  such  a  way 
that  preternatural  death  is  more  and 
more  avoided,  and  we  battle  with  the 
same  eagerness  against  wild  beasts  and 
murder  as  against  malady  and  misery. 
And  our  still  existent  horror  of  death 
we  may  regard  as  an  inherited  instinct, 
developed  in  the  prehistoric  times  when 
death  by  force  was  common.  All  in- 
stincts develop  slowly,  and  only  be- 


IMMORTALITY  67 

come  fixed  long  after  the  time  when  they 
might  begin  to  be  useful,  and  in  the 
same  way  all  once  acquired  instincts 
persist  long  after  the  time  when  their 
necessity  and  even  their  usefulness  has 
ceased.  We  may  then  think  of  a  dis- 
tant future  time  when  this  instinctive 
horror  of  death  will  have  disappeared 
through  the  slow  improvement  of  the 
human  race. 

There  remains  one  last  and  most  im- 
portant question,  What  becomes  of  the 
foundation  of  all  our  ethics  without 
the  idea  of  a  personal  future  life,  in 
which  vice  shall  be  punished  and  vir- 
tue rewarded  ? 

I  do  not  hesitate  to  answer  that  I 
not  only  think  ethics  possible  without 
this  idea,  but  that  I  even  think  that 
this  condition  involves  a  very  refined 


68    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

and  exalted  state  of  ethical  develop- 
ment. Let  us  consider  the  general 
facts  again. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  about  nature 
being  full  of  cruelty.  All  through  the 
whole  realm  of  organic  beings  we  find 
in  nearly  every  class  of  animals  and 
plants  some  species  which  live  at  the 
expense  of  their  fellow  creatures.  I 
mean  parasitic  organisms  of  every 
kind,  whether  they  live  in  the  interior 
of  their  hosts,  whom  they  kill  or  make 
miserable,  or  whether  they  feed  directly 
on  other  creatures.  No  one  thinks  of 
punishing  a  cat  who  tortures  a  poor 
mouse  for  no  vital  purpose  whatever, 
and  we  find  it  perfectly  natural  that 
the  larvae  of  certain  wasps  should  de- 
velop in  the  interior  of  caterpillars, 
slowly    devouring    their    hosts   from 


IMMORTALITY  69 

within.  It  is  only  man  who  tries  to 
change  this  general  way  of  nature's  and 
to  diminish  as  far  as  possible  cruelty 
and  injustice  to  his  fellow  men  and 
his  fellow  creatures.  And  from  the 
strong  desire  that  this  black  stain 
should  be  removed  as  fully  as  possi- 
ble from  humanity,  the  idea  developed 
that  there  must  be  beyond  our  bodily 
life  a  possibility  of  compensating  for 
the  evil  which  is  done  and  for  that 
which  is  suffered  during  life  without 
due  punishment  or  reward  as  sug- 
gested by  our  sense  of  justice. 

But  reward  and  punishment  take  on 
a  wholly  different  aspect  when  we  re- 
gard mankind  as  one  collective  being. 
Then  the  single  individual  is  compara- 
ble to  a  cell  in  a  highly  developed  or- 
ganism. Destruction  of  his  fellow  cells 


70    INDIVIDUALITY   AND 

would  be  a  nuisance  and  a  menace  to 
the  whole  organism,  and  therefore  any 
cell  which  destroyed  its  neighbors 
would  be  either  removed  from  the 
organism  or  else  encysted  and  kept 
from  doing  further  damage.  And  on 
the  other  hand  such  cells  as  fulfilled 
useful  purposes  would  be  nourished 
and  protected. 

The  very  necessity  for  overcoming 
such  dangerous  actions  on  the  part  of 
the  cells  means  a  decrease  in  the  effi- 
ciency of  the  organism,  since  the  work 
necessary  for  the  purpose  could  be 
better  used  for  the  immediate  benefit 
of  the  organism  itself.  The  best  thing 
would  then  be  to  avoid  beforehand  the 
formation  of  such  bad  cells,  and  an  or- 
ganism possessed  of  appropriate  means 
of  doing  this  would  have  a  great  ad- 
vantage. 


IMMORTALITY  71 

The  application  of  these  considera- 
tions to  the  human  collective  organ- 
ism is  obvious.  Punishment  means 
in  every  case  a  loss,  and  the  aim  of 
increasing  culture  is  not  to  make  pun- 
ishment more  effective,  but  to  make 
it  unnecessary.  The  more  each  indi- 
vidual is  filled  with  the  consciousness 
that  he  belongs  to  the  great  collective 
organism  of  humanity,  the  less  will 
he  be  able  to  separate  his  own  aims 
and  interests  from  those  of  humanity. 
A  reconciliation  between  duty  to 
the  race  and  personal  happiness  is 
the  result,  as  well  as  an  unmistakable 
standard  by  which  to  judge  our  own 
actions  and  those  of  our  fellow  men. 

Self-sacrifice  has  been  considered  in 
all  ages  and  by  all  religions  as  the  very 
highest  perfection  of  ethical  develop- 


72    INDIVIDUALITY  AND 

ment.  At  the  same  time  every  man  who 
has  thought  a  little  deeper  has  been 
aware  that  the  self-sacrifice  must  have 
a  meaning,  that  it  must  result  in  some 
effect  which  could  not  be  attained  by- 
other  means.  Otherwise  the  self-sacri- 
fice would  not  be  a  gain,  but  rather  a 
loss,  to  humanity.  But  we  consider 
self-sacrifice  for  the  sake  of  humanity 
as  justified,  and  this  corresponds  with 
our  general  feeling.  We  admire  a 
man  who  throws  himself  into  a  fire  or 
a  torrent  to  save  a  child  from  death  ; 
it  should  mean  even  more  to  us  when 
a  physician  goes  into  the  midst  of  a 
raging  pestilence  conscious  of  the  peril 
awaiting  him.  But  we  do  not  esteem 
a  man  the  more  for  risking  his  life  to 
save  his  money  from  a  burning  house. 
In  fact,  we  find  the  interests  of  hu- 


IMMORTALITY  73 

manity  in  the  very  centre  of  our  ethi- 
cal consciousness.  To  frighten  people 
into  ethical  action  by  threatening  them 
with  eternal  punishment  is  a  poor  and 
inefficacious  way  of  influencing  them. 
The  natural  way  is  to  develop  a  con- 
sciousness of  the  all-pervading  relation 
between  the  several  individuals  which 
make  up  humanity,  and  this  to  such  a 
degree  that  the  corresponding  actions 
become  not  only  a  duty  but  a  habit, 
and  at  last  an  instinct,  directing  all  our 
doings  quite  spontaneously  for  the 
interest  of  humanity.  And  every 
mental  and  moral  advance  which  we 
make  for  ourselves  by  our  constant 
efforts  at  self-education  will  be  at  the 
same  time  a  gain  for  humanity,  since 
it  will  be  transmitted  to  our  children, 
our  friends,  and  our  pupils,  and  will 


74  IMMORTALITY 

be  to  them  easier  than  it  was  to  us, 
according  to  the  general  law  of  mem- 
ory. Beside  the  fact  of  inherited  taint 
there  exists  the  fact  of  inherited  per- 
fection, and  every  advance  which  we, 
by  the  sweat  of  our  brows,  may  succeed 
in  making  towards  our  own  perfection, 
is  so  much  gain  for  our  children  and 
our  children's  children  forever.  I  must 
confess  that  I  can  think  of  no  grander 
perspective  of  immortality  than  this. 


CAMBRIDGE  •  MASSACHUSETTS 
U   .   S   •    A 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


tHfiR-g&*93& 


29May'57LS 


-5— 


—4 


MOcHgjn 


ryr  •-  t 


^0ct!62DT 


REC'D  LD 


OCT  2    1362 


INTER-LIBRARY 


LOAN 


3 


^SBBKk 


V* 


i 


,.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


C03l252iab 


360469 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


